"Better" in some ways but more restrictive in others.
The accuracy of your view would explain why adoption is not being embraced by many. Many of whom are passionate and principled opponents who have been winning this battle for a decade and more.
Why? Because users also have rights and don't want Norbert the Nark inside their equipment.
By the way, the government in your model creates holes. The sort you can continue to run a surveillance state through.
If you are right and sovereigns have network-based access then this project is a waste of everyone's time.
User privacy against sovereign invasion via the network is the litmus test of whether such a system is worth deploying.
Maybe this is the kind of project for which the new American ideal of universal surveillance is toxic.
Swiss redesign needed. Omitting sovereign cheese holes.
| 
